Talk of The Villages Florida - Water experiment

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- The Villages, Florida, Non Villages Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/)

- - Water experiment (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/water-experiment-342581/)

And BTW, I drive a Tesla and limit consumption of red meat. But neither has anything to do with climate change. 🙃

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pugchief (Post 2234252)

LOL, I already surmised your perspective.

I will be curious to see if anybody with an opposing point of view can answer those questions in a non-disingenuous way.

Good luck with that

Quote:

Originally Posted by kp11364 (Post 2233821)

In regard to a recently closed thread about rising water levels, try this:

1. Fill a drinking glass half-full with water
2. Add 2-3 ice cubes. Look at the water level.
3. Put the glass aside; let all the ice melt. You will see that the water level remains the same. Why? Because the amount of water remains the same, regardless of the state of the water.

Not true. The density of both water and ice varies with temperature. Ice expands enough that a full plastic bottle of water will burst in your freezer. There are charts of the density of both water and ice at different temperatures and pressures used by design teams. You need to correct the densities for impurities, of course.
The statement seems true because only a (small) glass of water/ice is used and the elder human eye can't discern the change in meniscus. There is a change in volume.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carlsondm (Post 2234269)

Not true. The density of both water and ice varies with temperature. Ice expands enough that a full plastic bottle of water will burst in your freezer. There are charts of the density of both water and ice at different temperatures and pressures used by design teams. You need to correct the densities for impurities, of course.
The statement seems true because only a (small) glass of water/ice is used and the elder human eye can't discern the change in meniscus. There is a change in volume.

This is incorrect. See replies #6, #10, or #12 for an explanation.

(though it is true that the small glass and the meniscus of water would make measurement difficult)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill14564 (Post 2234275)

Your words seem to belie your true feelings as demonstrated by your arguments. No believer in denier's clothing, more like a true denier posing as a skeptic.

I am not interested in playing whack-a-mole with you.

When the debate is lost or one doesn't have a reasonable answer to the argument posed, the only option is to resort to ad hominem to deflect.

As you wish.

Pump ocean water into the Sahara Desert and ocean levels will noticably decrease. It's a solution that only requires the will to do it; all the technology already exists and it's simple to implement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tophcfa (Post 2233871)

ya ya ya, whatever. Does any of this nonsense effect the price or availability of tee times?

my bartenders are in charge of my ice situations

love your demonstration!

It's great when someone injects common sense into the global warming debate.

I remember in the 1960's all the talk shows were in an uproar over GLOBAL COOLING; they claimed the "ice cap" was growing so big, it would tip the earth upside-down!

The "loonies" will always be with us I assume..

Quote:

Originally Posted by dougawhite (Post 2234294)

Pump ocean water into the Sahara Desert and ocean levels will noticably decrease. It's a solution that only requires the will to do it; all the technology already exists and it's simple to implement.

This is an example of a "fix". Thank you for a productive contribution.

I have not read up on this concept, but if feasible, this fix could potentially solve one issue. Similar fixes could solve others. Humankind's ability to solve problems through technology is amazing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dougawhite (Post 2234294)

Pump ocean water into the Sahara Desert and ocean levels will noticably decrease. It's a solution that only requires the will to do it; all the technology already exists and it's simple to implement.

Would this work or perhaps have unintended and unexpected consequences?

The ross ice shelf, antarctica

All ice fans will enjoy this book

Quote:

Originally Posted by dougawhite (Post 2234294)

Pump ocean water into the Sahara Desert and ocean levels will noticably decrease. It's a solution that only requires the will to do it; all the technology already exists and it's simple to implement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 2234317)

Would this work or perhaps have unintended and unexpected consequences?

If the oceans are expected to rise by one inch in the next 50 years (I believe it might be sooner than that) then it would require pumping 92,000,000 gals/min for each and every minute of that 50 years to counter that one inch rise.

This would fill the Sahara to a depth of 39" with not one drop making its way back into the Mediterranean Sea or the Nile River.

Please excuse what I am sure is going to be an oversimplified thought. On the barrier islands I inhabit, the Gulf has crept closer to my home, condo business. This would be three islands. For the past twenty five years at least, we remedy this by "beach renourishment". On the island where my office is, 8.7 million cubic yards of sand was added to the beach that runs about 15 miles long. The sand is brought to the beach from a barge and pipe system sitting a mile off shore, and dump trucks bringing sand from inland locations. Could this not be an option for places like Miami Beach? We have also built concrete groins to catch sand on the outgoing tides.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whitley (Post 2234461)

It sounds good to "re-nourish" a stretch of sandy beach and it may work in the SHORT term. But, let's look at the LONG term disadvantages in the equation. It is difficult to beat MOTHER NATURE. Sand is heavy. Large dump trucks and earth movers have large diesel engines which are spitting out exhaust full of CO and CO2. Which adds to the stratospheric layer that is reflecting HEAT back to our earth's surface.
To be "poetic" about it, that HEAT angers OUR mother. Right now, today she has produced heat advisories from Ca. to Florida (we can feel that HEAT). She has taken out her displeasure in the form of heat strokes for humans in the southern USA. Montpelier, Vermont is practically underwater from record rains and floods. Just the cost to rebuild the roads to Montpelier will be a HUGE setback and expense for the state.
People had warnings about this present climate catastrophe as far back as 1950 (scientists knew the danger). We are all now paying for the inaction and the DENIERS (that still exist among us). Beautiful beaches and coral reefs did NOT have to be "re-nourished" in the 1950s. The 1950s did NOT have the RECORD man-made HEAT from climate change that we do today. The population of the US was probably about 150 million back then. So, there was NOT the big demand for fossil fuel energy used in industry and automobiles.
Science warned us, but the fossil fuel industry fought the knowledge and science (and they won). Basically, stupidity and deceit won the day. And today we are left with a wounded planet. We beat up our own mother!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whitley (Post 2234461)

Miami Beach has been renourished in the past, mostly because of storm erosion, not because of rising water levels. Usually, the main reason for beach renourishment is for recreation purposes. I remember when the Army Corps of Engineers refused to renourish the beach at Hilton Head, South Carolina until they provided more free publc access to the beach.