[insert your own caption here]
Vancouver Sun/Reuters
ANTARCTICA — Sea levels will rise at varying rates around the world because of a quirk of the earth’s gravity linked to global warming, a leading glaciologist said.
“Everyone thinks sea level rises the same around the world,” David Vaughan, of the British Antarctic Survey, said on Tuesday at the Rothera Base on the Antarctic Peninsula. “But it doesn’t”.
Rises could vary by tens of centimetres from region to region if seas gained by an average of one metre by 2100 as temperatures rise, he said. Worst-affected nations would have to budget billions of dollars more than others on coastal defences.
Vaughan said big ice sheets on Antarctica and on Greenland have a gravitational pull that lifts the seas around them — water levels around Antarctica, for instance, are higher than if the frozen continent were an open ocean.
As ice thaws, Antarctica would get smaller and its gravitational tug would diminish.
UPDATE: With the humorous photo I chose, I may have unintentionally implied that the gravitational effect described is not true. It is and the simplest physics. The likely magnitude and the suggestion of Antarctica melting are the main issues. Here is a paper from MIT that describes Earth’s gravity anomaly and sea level differences. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@This is, again, “Hollywood science”, as professor Khabibulo Abdusamatov characterized global warming theory.
Link to a Abdusamatov’s paper:
http://www.giurfa.com/abdusamatov2.pdf
wait, we better calulate the effect of large cities on sea level rise. I wonder what the mass of coastal cities like New York City have on the sea level. I mean, asphalt/steel/concrete and eveything else we’ve added must have brought up the sea level [/sarc off]
Thanks Mike Monce for busting their hypothesis. Anyone with half a brain should realize that the mass of the ice is in no way comparable to the mass of the Earth, and should make little difference to sea level changes.
Global Warming – The New Baking Soda!
Is there NOTHING it can’t do????
Re: Mike Monce (05:52:27) :
Exactly – simple physics that these virtual land of nod climatologists appear to either ignore or don’t understand.
The computer says….
This is what happens if you drop your bonzaicat onto a concrete floor!
not only is that cats name is Al, i bet it invented the cartoon Garfield…
I have a theory. The true cause of Anthropogenic climate change is not CO2, water vapour, or any of that ‘scientific’ stuff. Nothing to do with the laws of physics at all. It’s caused by lazy journalism, poor fact checking, bandwagon jumping, and political manouevring.
More news as research funding comes in.
This was a cartoon interlude, right?
Or are people really this ignorant.
Allan M (02:24:14) :
It’s not a theory it’s a fact. If you want to lose weight quickly, fly from either pole to the equator and weigh before yourself leave and when you land.
Dave in Canada (04:48:13) :
No because maximum gravitational force is at the surface and not the center. This is because the maximum mass is between you and the other side of the planet.
NOTE:
With the humorous photo I chose, I may have unintentionally implied that the gravitational effect described is not true. It is and the simplest physics. The likely magnitude and the suggestion of Antarctica melting are the main issues. Here is a paper from MIT
http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Earth–Atmospheric–and-Planetary-Sciences/12-808Fall-2004/A740D69D-9E59-401D-89E9-BE2F0EFD0194/0/course_notes_3b.pdf
that describes Earth’s gravity anomaly and sea level differences.
BTW my entry for the caption would have been:
“Above: the gravity well of canned tuna”
– Anthony
Where did you get the picture of Lucias cat?
Here is a project that may interest WUWT readers:
Climate researchers seek citizen scientists
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008838705_buds11m.html
Yes Anthony the effect of gravitation is certainly real, I remember reading the reports form the 2005 tsunami in southeast asia, the first thing people noticed was that the sea level was actually lowering, the water seemed to dissapear. I thouhgt about this and came to the conclusion that the enormous mass of the tsunami wave was attracting the water in front of it, this probaly amplifies the effect of a tsunami. Gravitation is sometimes hard to grasp, we never really have to think about it, it’s just there, not much to do about it.
We should fund ocean cruises for obese people. Not only will they sequester more carbon at the buffet table, but the gravity from their bulk will help draw ocean water away from the coasts. This will be at least as effect as cap-and-trade for slowing the rise of the sea level.
Caption: Jim Hansen and Al Gore are investing millions of dollars in a new carbon storage technology that will be more efficient than underground storage… cats will save the planet.
Steve M. (06:46:40) I know you posted re: sinking cities in sarcasm, but I read where Manhattan is sinking from the buildings there, and Shanghi is sinking at 1.5cm/yr, ie. 15mm/year, a lot faster than the sealevel increase at 3.3mm/yr.
MartinGAtkins (08:13:17) I want to know who cloned our cat Buckey before he passed on a couple of years ago. We adopted him at 8yrs and 27lbs with the name ‘Volleyball’. I thought he was humiliated by his name and named him a more obscure allusion to a spheriod as ‘Bucky’, with reference to fullerenes.
The only effect that could arise from the melting of the Antartic would come from 1. the volume of liquid water added to the oceans and 2. the lift of the continent from not having this mass of ice on top of it. But there might also be something about the increased level of water at the equator from the centrifugal pull du to the rotation of the earth. Would the earth turn slower though if the ocean level rises?
But regardless of Peter Pan science, do we have any proof that Antartica ever completely melted in the past?
Ice sheets and gravity are discussed in “Polar Wander, Sea-Level Variations and Ice Age Cycles” by L.L.A. Vermeersen and R. Sabadini, Surveys in Geophysics 20; 415 – 440, 1999.
In their paper they acknowledge the work of R.S Woodward “On the form and position of mean sea level” in 1888 USGS Bull 48, 87-170. He goes thru derivations for the gravitational attracton of an ice sheet.
So, it isn’t new, but it is good to see the idea get more exposure. We do live in a complicated place
By logical extention we could assume that everyone that arrives in Antarctica automatically weighs more when arriving. Does anyone know where on earth is the location with the least gravity? We should set up a weight loss spa there where you are guaranteed to lose weight immediately upon arrival. Technically true but scamfull nonetheless.
Ray (08:49:46)
Yes certainly, but how much I don’t know. Think of an ice dancer doing a piruette, he or she controls the rotational speed of the piruette with the arms, when they raise there arms and hold them closer to theire vertical mass center the rotational speed increses if they hold the arms out from their body it decreases, all to keep the living energy constant. Besides the hockey finals soon start here in Sweden, so by by for me!
MartinGAtkins
“BTW, isn’t there more gravitational pull at the poles because the Earth bulges at the equator, therefore you are further from the center of the Earth.”
In your reply you said
“No because maximum gravitational force is at the surface and not the center. This is because the maximum mass is between you and the other side of the planet.”
I’m pretty sure this is incorrect the controlling factor is that at the pole you are closer to the center of mass therefore the force of gravity is greater. The amount of mass involved and it’s position relative to you is not different. Additionally the rotation of the earth gives you some momentum that tends to reduce the net force of gravity, this reduction is greatest at the equator. In short you weigh more at the poles.
Oh wow Ray!
I guess the world really would turn slower if the ice caps melted… how much slower? this is most cool you have given me a wonderful rotational dynamics problem to use on my students next semester.
Glad I could help you Wondering Aloud. It’s something else they will have to add to the dooms… we will have to change all of our clocks or add another day tyo the calendar… like February 30th every 4th years…
Mike Monce
Thanks for the calculation, you must have been in moderation before I posted.
Fellow citizens of the world.
Please grant us your sympathy. All of us in the UK have to pay a significant mandatory tax that allows the BBC to transmit this rubbish. I guarantee that ICCC will not get a mention – they don’t do facts.