Sailing

[Fealiks]

Ice melting will affect us, yeah, but it wont raise the sea levels, I'm surprised how so many people can't see how that is bull****. Just think about it for a minute. The ice is already in the water, which means melting it would just mean... less ice. Not more water. Less ice. I know I'm not going to miss that ice, and I also know that the sea isn't coming knocking at my door any time soon. As for the weather changes, I could do with a tan and a good snowball fight wouldn't hurt either.

If you still don't believe me, fill a measuring jug to a certain amount and pop a few ice cubes in there. Take note of where the water level sits on the little numbery bit on the side (make sure to do this part after you put the ice in to avoid water displacement confusion). Leave it for a bit, let the ice melt. When you come back, you'll see that the water level is still the same as it was before the ice melted. The ice caps melting will do **** all to our sea levels. Fact.

Also, I know this sounds really stupid (and it is) but if we get rid of loads of species that we have never seen before... well it won't matter that much will it? It's like crying over spilling some undiscovered liquid. Drinking it could have put hairs on your chest and gold on your teeth but it didn't and now it's all gone so you may as well bugger off and have a sandwich. Just being a blind optimist.

[Joshi]

Okay, fill up a water jug, put an ice cube in it, watch now it floats, half the cube (well, okay, not half, a bit more) is submerged, some is not. That means not as much water is being displaced as it should be. Push the ice cube down to submerge it fully, watch as the water rises... get it? Watching a tiny ice cube melt in a small jug is a poor experiment as water expands when frozen, and thus it's volume decreases when melting so the change to the amount of water in the jug would be miniscule. Try a giant ice block in a swimming pool and see the difference.

And as for those species we don't know about dying, yes, we would be crying over spilt liquid we didn't know about, but if that liquid could cure a cancer, for instance, we'd be crying even harder.

[Fealiks]

Regardless of whether the ice is submerged or not, it's still in the water. When the ice melts, you aren't adding more water so why should the level of the water change?

And while we cry we could be finding a different cure for cancer. As I said, it's a stupid view but it's optimistic enough for me and ignorance is bliss. la la la. I can't hear you, destroyed potential cure for cancer.

[Thrik]

I think you need to read Joshi's post again. Comprehend his explanation properly this time.

And the reason people don't think it's bullsh*t is because it's already risen. Not only is there stacks of evidence compiled during the past few decades, but also evidence from previous ice ages.

Sea level change isn't some myth.

[SeaTurtle]

Originally Posted by Fealiks

Regardless of whether the ice is submerged or not, it's still in the water. When the ice melts, you aren't adding more water so why should the level of the water change?

Because liquids take up more room than solids. I'm definitely not an expert on this, but I do remember some A-level chemistry (or maybe it was GCSE?). The molecules in a solid don't move about. The molecules in a liquid do move and so are spread out more. So, even though you aren't adding more water, the volume of water is increasing because the molecules are moving further apart. Does that make sense?

[Joshi]

Originally Posted by Fealiks

Regardless of whether the ice is submerged or not, it's still in the water. When the ice melts, you aren't adding more water so why should the level of the water change?

For the love of Benji... fill a bath, put self into bath, notice how when you're not fully submerged, you're still in the water, now slowly submerge yourself and watch the water level rise, this is how displacement works. Ice is exactly the same, if there is ice above the water level, it is not displacing any of the water it is floating in, and thus when it melts, it all melts, so that above the water is adding to the water it is floating in. Ask a science teacher...

As for that cure for cancer, I'm sure you'll feel the same way should you be diagnosed with some kind of cancer.

Seaturtle, water expands when frozen so it would take up less space when melted, but you may be thinking of surface area.

[Fealiks]

I'm no ice expert and I'm the sharpest spoon in the shed but I'm adamant that melting ice that's already in water won't change the level of the water. I'm pretty sure I'm right about that. That doesn't matter any more though, as an obvious revelation has struck me that a large amount of the ice is on land, not on water so I can hold my chin high and tell people how right I am (even if I'm probably not) with the grass beneath the ice as my alibi.

And if I got diagnosed with cancer, I'd be busy not giving a **** to think twice about the Amazon.

[Thrik]

Well, I guess it's pretty easy to be adamant you're right about something if you don't bother reading the thousands upon thousands of pages of documented evidence that oppose your assertion, as well as decades of scientific research.

Just because you don't understand the maths or physics doesn't mean they're not in effect.

[Joshi]

As Thrik says.

Seriously, how is something not in the water displacing said water. Any ice floating above the water will add to the sea when melted, I don't see how you don't get this. By your logic, if I stick my hand in a bucket of water, an entire Joshi's worth of water will be displaced. Seriously, ask a science teacher, or read a book, or just anything that might educate you before making such claims.

[SeaTurtle]

Originally Posted by Joshi

Seaturtle, water expands when frozen so it would take up less space when melted, but you may be thinking of surface area.

*facepalm* Of course it does. How could I forget that? I swear I'm getting more stupid as I get older. I was actually quite clever when I was at school. Honestly, I was.

Anyway, carry on.

[Fealiks]

Originally Posted by Joshi

As Thrik says.

Seriously, how is something not in the water displacing said water. Any ice floating above the water will add to the sea when melted, I don't see how you don't get this. By your logic, if I stick my hand in a bucket of water, an entire Joshi's worth of water will be displaced. Seriously, ask a science teacher, or read a book, or just anything that might educate you before making such claims.

Actually I spoke to my science teacher about it ages ago and heard a lengthily interview on the radio about this but since I can't really back myself up and can't remember enough to be articulate about this I think I'll just go back to being comfortably stupid..

[Kjølen]

The bit of snow particles that rest ON TOP of the ice in the poles is enough to cover much of the green land, if melted.

[Fealiks]

Really? Where did you hear that?

[Brighteyes]

S' people like you Fealiks that keep me in a job, teaching those too lazy to look past the end of their garden path. ****in hell man, theres alot of good to come from curing people from whatever ails them ie: cancer. But if those people with cancer havent got anything to live on ie: the earth cos we destroyed it using all our spare time to cure the population that is pulling the provebial rug from underneath it's own feet, then whats the point.
Heres a speculation for ya: If world poverty was ended would the planet cope? Probably not, if death and disease were decreased would our planet survive? Death is a part of the life cycle and we spend all our time attempting to prevent it. You ain't gonna die, you just won't be human anymore (no offence to hinduism/buddhism etc).
BUT when the way we live detroys the very thing that gave us life
(b4 you say it fealiks im not talking about your parents) then we've got to do some drastic re-modelling of society which could start with small things like not eating at unsustainable franchises and more importantly "Learn and attempt to understand what keeps you alive and how it should be treated" and please i know your young but it's bloody important.

PS: Thanks for knowing your stuff guys theres alot of people out thee that work bloody hard for ridiculously low pay and at the sacrifice of the lifestyle they'd like just to help the population realise whats going on out there. Its real encouraging to know some peeps are finding it out on their own. Means alot.

[Fealiks]

Originally Posted by Brighteyes

S' people like you Fealiks that keep me in a job, teaching those too lazy to look past the end of their garden path.

We wouldn't be having this argument if I hadn't looked past the end of my garden path.

Originally Posted by Brighteyes

BUT when the way we live detroys the very thing that gave us life
(b4 you say it fealiks im not talking about your parents)

I wasn't actually going to say anything, but yeah now you've brought it up, the Earth didn't give me life.

Originally Posted by Brighteyes

then we've got to do some drastic re-modelling of society which could start with small things like not eating at unsustainable franchises

How is that going to help anything?

Edit:

Sorry if I came off in this post (and all of my others) like an arsehole, I don't mean to be.

[Joshi]

Originally Posted by Fealiks

I wasn't actually going to say anything, but yeah now you've brought it up, the Earth didn't give me life.

Yes it did, were it not for us living off the of the Earth, from the food it gives us to the shelter, we wouldn't be here today. The earth certainly did give us life, and if we continue down the path were going, it'll take it away too.

[Fealiks]

Well okay, "the Earth" is really vague but I get what you're saying. And if we're continuing down the path we're going, WE will take it away not the Earth (I know the chances of you seriously blaming it on the Earth are really slim... just thought I'd throw it out there...).

And while we're on the subject of saving the planet, let's talk about recycling. Everyone thinks that recycling is the best thing since fried bread, but I think I've found evidence that recycling is actually a load of crap and isn't helping anything. Daniel K. Benjamin is an author who exposes the 8 myths of recycling. There is a PDF available here: http://www.perc.org/pdf/ps28.pdf

Here are the 8 essential myths he exposes:
1. “Our garbage will bury us”
2. “Our garbage will poison us”
3. “Packaging is our problem”
4. “We must achieve trash independence”
5. “We squander irreplacable resources when we don’t recycle”
6. “Recycling always protects the environment”
7. “Recycling saves resources”
8. “Without forced recycling mandates, there wouldn’t be recycling”

[tk102]

Originally Posted by Joshi

Ice is exactly the same, if there is ice above the water level, it is not displacing any of the water it is floating in, and thus when it melts, it all melts, so that above the water is adding to the water it is floating in.

Correct observation but wrong conclusion. You are assuming that the volume of ice remains constant when it melts but it does not.

1. The volume of water displaced by ice is the volume of the ice that is submerged in the water.

2. Gravity acts on the ice and the displaced water identically. Llike a balance scale, the force of the ice pushing down into the water is balanced by the force of the water pushing up due to water being displaced. Because gravitational acceleration is constant, equal forces mean equal mass. Therefore the mass of the ice is equal to the mass of the water displaced.

3. Ice has a specific gravity of about 0.92. That means that 100cc of ice weighs the same as 92cc of water (92g) and thus 100cc of ice will displace 92cc of water and the other 8cc will be floating above the surface.

4. When the ice melts into water its mass stays the same as before (92g) but now it only takes up 92cc. The volume of the melted ice is the same as the volume of water displaced by the solid ice.

Conclusion: No change in displacement of water due to melting ice.

Originally Posted by Joshi

Ask a science teacher...

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Physics-1...echanics-1.htm

[Brighteyes]

Resources? Now he states that curbside recycling uses a large amount of capital, so mainly his twisted conclusions state that curbside collection is bad due to the cost, not what he started to say and thats about conserving resources.

Gotta admit i do agree with the transportation of recyclables being a problem.
we can conclude

"that there is plenty of fossil fuel available for the foreseeable future." -
He can ram this fact up his arse!

"Many life forms exist today in the quantities they do only because
humans use them, and thus have taken care to make sure they are
abundant."
Yeah it's called reforestation and it's a BAD thing mostly due to the increase of undesirable species that are already abundant that then overun and decimate the weaker species. PLUS the growth of extra forests isn't great because the species that use them are obviously adaptable at living in a human disturbed environment. IE: Deer, foxes etc. So what happens to the dwellers that needed the moss growth or foliage that was in the forest and takes decades to regrow. They only reforest with undesirable tree species upsetting natures balance. Whereas before there may have been a great ancient woodland, there'll now be and forever a well maintained, heavily used neat and tidy pine forest which is no bloody use to any of the species there beforehand. Also increasing the number of scavangers, a good example is the battle of red and grey squirrels.

"Recycling is a long-practiced, productive, indeed essential,
element of the market system." - He's not against recycling as stated.
So i'm afraid it does not quote that "recycling is a load of crap". He just reckons its commercial and essential for making money.
So if recyclings so bad prove me why recycling one glass jar saving enough energy to power a TV for and hour is a bad thing?

[Joshi]

Originally Posted by tk102

Correct observation but wrong conclusion. You are assuming that the volume of ice remains constant when it melts but it does not.

1. The volume of water displaced by ice is the volume of the ice that is submerged in the water.

2. Gravity acts on the ice and the displaced water identically. Llike a balance scale, the force of the ice pushing down into the water is balanced by the force of the water pushing up due to water being displaced. Because gravitational acceleration is constant, equal forces mean equal mass. Therefore the mass of the ice is equal to the mass of the water displaced.

3. Ice has a specific gravity of about 0.92. That means that 100cc of ice weighs the same as 92cc of water (92g) and thus 100cc of ice will displace 92cc of water and the other 8cc will be floating above the surface.

4. When the ice melts into water its mass stays the same as before (92g) but now it only takes up 92cc. The volume of the melted ice is the same as the volume of water displaced by the solid ice.

Conclusion: No change in displacement of water due to melting ice.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Physics-1...echanics-1.htm

Fair enough, I was still partially right, but not knowing enough about physics, not right enough.

[Kjølen]

Floating ice melting in freshwater will not rise the water level. Seawater is a different matter though:
http://www.physorg.com/news5619.html
Also, most of the icecaps are on land such as Greenland and Antarctica, so melting ice is still a concern.

[Fealiks]

Originally Posted by Kjølen

Also, most of the icecaps are on land such as Greenland and Antarctica, so melting ice is still a concern.

Yeah, I already said that, it pretty much blows the whole no rise in sea levels thing out of the water. Erm.. No pun intended...

[Joshi]

Originally Posted by Fealiks

Yeah, I already said that, it pretty much blows the whole no rise in sea levels thing out of the water. Erm.. No pun intended...

Meh, you were wrong and I was wrong, we learn something new every day.

[Kjølen]

I was the only one who was right.

[Fealiks]

Now let's all skip home together.

[Joshi]

I don't skip... I trot.

[Fealiks]

You trot? Show me the way.

[Joshi]

I cannot teach you the way... but I will allow you to learn.

[Kjølen]

What is seen cannot be unseen.

[Joshi]

You watched it, you cannot unwatch it!

[Fealiks]

I am missing vital informations.

[Joshi]

And that is why you fail.

[Fealiks]

Darn.

[Doc Valentine]

Sorry to re-rail the derailed topic, but I did some sailing as a young child with my father when I used to live by the bay. I remember we would always get up really early in the morning, take the covers off the boat and let her rip. Those were honestly some of the best times in my life. I just wish we still had that boat .

[Joshi]

Amazing isn't it... how this thread was once about sailing.

[Fealiks]

I've never sailed.

[Joshi]

I have, wasn't that memorable really.

[Fealiks]

I've never been in any sort of boat, plane or helicopter. Or truck. Or motorbike. In fact I've only ever been in/on cars, vans, pushbikes, rollerblades, skateboards, scooters (not the motor kind) and pogo sticks.

[Joshi]

I've been in planes, trains, automobiles, boats, choppers (the heli-kind) on a motorcycle and a space shuttle (though the space shuttle wasn't in space at the time).

[Fealiks]

Actually yeah, I've been in trains.

So what's it like in a space shuttle?